Hi team, quick question, is there a way we can avoid sending the logs into PR? Even if after I removed the

--log-level

flag when running infracost breakdown command, infracost still sending the logs back to the github pull request

For all of you interested in the parsing HCL option, we’re looking for feedback on a new feature to compare different Infracost runs 🤓

z

Hi team, Regarding to issue https://github.com/infracost/infracost/issues/421, I would like to know the usage file format of google_compute_address/google_compute_global_address because it’s not quite clear in the doc. I want to use just one type of the IP address, how can I specify it in usage file. The current output shows all the cases:

├─ IP address (if used by standard VM)                                                    730  hours                  $2.92 
 ├─ IP address (if used by preemptible VM)                                                 730  hours                  $1.46 
 └─ IP address (if unused)                                                                 730  hours                  $0.00

Hi Folks I was just playing around with infracost cloud pricing api. I could not find the schema/swagger for the API. I was wondering how can I get to know what all attributes do the queries support?

I’m giving a demo of Infracost to the Spotify Backstage community, you can watch live as we explore collaboration opportunities with the backstage community:

Greetings ... I am working on scoping out a project that is related to infracost, but based around the idea of generating costing information that would be used by infracost to compare a physical data center deployment to a public cloud provider. We have nicknamed the project IFF (Infrastructure Financial Framework). Our objective is to reconcile financial data stored within an ERP system and then associate those items to categories, with allocations if aggregated, within the framework to generate absolute, loaded and retail costing values that would then be used by infracost. We would be looking to store physical asset information within Netbox with an association back to the purchase of the item. I am interested in finding somebody who is willing to participate in the scoping effort and then be brought on as a contractor to develop the code associated with the framework, which would be open sourced, ideally as a complement to infracost. This way infracost's focus would remain in tact and colocated or on-premises deployments would make use of IFF. We are more concerned with the backend functionality before putting any significant efforts into creating a GUI.

Hi all, I’m currently developing an Infracost integration with Keptn so infracost can be used as part of a CD sequence. I know the Keptn side but I’d love someone with Infracost knowledge to join me! Any takers? Very very very early draft version here:

<https://github.com/agardnerIT/infracost-terraform-docker>

<!here> Hi everyone, first of all, great tool. I'm trying trigger an infracost comment to a GitLab MR. I've followed the guide and template but getting 401 when posting the comment (see printscreen attached). how the gitlab api token should look like? should it contain my user email or only the token I've created from Access Token (see print screen). Thanks in advance.

Hello everyone! Thanks a lot for this amazing tool. Nowadays we have been trying to implement it to our environment, however I run into a problem that I explained here. I had the same problem during Atlantis implementation and skipped it somehow, but for Infracost, it seems mandatory. Have you ever come across with this issue? Thanks in advance!

Hi, I wonder if it would not be possible to have a detailed report on the HTML output part (as well). Indeed I have the total simulation price (for example) of all my lambdas, however I have lost the finesse I may have had before (when I was reporting on github comments). Thank you very much for this really great product!

This PR: https://github.com/infracost/infracost/issues/1567#event-6526198147 added in some cool support for compare-to (Thanks a lot!). I was hoping to be able to use the output of the diff to comment on a PR similar to the original method. I'm messing around in these two PRs with how I'd expect it to work: https://github.com/lzysh/terraform-google-project/pull/60/files https://github.com/lzysh/terraform-google-cloud-sql/pull/26/files Am I missing something here?

📣 Infracost v0.9.23 is live! It includes: • A faster and simpler way to run Infracost (

--terraform-parse-hcl

) and compare runs (

--compare-to

) ◦ The

terraform-parse-hcl

option now supports Terragrunt, TF_VAR_ environment variables and TFC remote execution variables. ◦ Lookout for more improvements in this area going forward, including updated CI/CD integrations. • New AWS and Google resources • Many other fixes 👉 I’m looking for 3 people to help me do a quick usability test on the updated getting started guide, it’ll take 20mins and you’ll get a pair of InfraSocks as a small thank you gift. Ping me if you can help 🙇

Hi team, is there a way we can add support for service annotation here https://github.com/infracost/helm-charts/blob/master/charts/cloud-pricing-api/templates/service.yaml ? something like this service.yaml

kind: Service
 metadata:
   name: {{ include "cloud-pricing-api.fullname" . }}
+  annotations:
+{{ toYaml .Values.service.annotations | indent 4 }}
   labels:
     {{- include "cloud-pricing-api.labels" . | nindent 4 }}

values.yaml

type: ClusterIP
   # -- Kubernetes service port
   port: 80
+  annotations:
+    {}

Hi everyone. Today we and HashiCorp are launching a Terraform Cloud feature called Run Tasks into General Availability! You can now integrate Infracost directly into the Terraform Cloud workflow in about 3 minutes! May the 4th be with you! https://www.infracost.io/blog/terraform-cost-estimation-with-runtasks-infracost/

anyone going to kubecon next week?

Is anyone visiting AWS Summit Berlin this week?

📣 Hi everyone, we just published our May 2022 update blog, which includes: • our updated Get Started guide that defaults to parsing HCL so the CLI is super-fast • a way to diff between branches • new resources Thanks to everyone who reported issues, sent a PR and helped with this release - stay tuned for v0.10 next month with many improvements that we discussed at our recent Recurring Employee Meetup (REM). 👉 Join our community call on Thursday 12 May to discuss the above and more.

Infracost community call starting now… https://us06web.zoom.us/j/99421485564

Hi 👋 I'm Harsh and I'm working on QHub, open-source tool to deploy compute/data science platforms on Kubernetes. We are primarily using Terraform templates across all major cloud providers (AWS, GCP, Azure, Digital Ocean) to deploy and version the infrastructure. Right now, we are looking to integrate cloud cost estimates, for both us as developers and end-users and I am looking into Infracost for the purpose. I have setup the CLI and ran some basic cost estimates. However given the fact that we have our Terraform templates distributed across various sub-directories (for various cloud providers and stages), is there a way to generate a more credible report taking into account all of them. Over time, we would like to integrate this over our CI/CD (GitHub Actions) and hence wanted to develop some understanding of the tool. Thanks for the awesome (and open-source) offering!

Hey everyone, as we get closer to releasing v0.10, we’re looking for a few people to help us test the migration doc - please ping me if you’re using our GitHub Actions or GitLab CI integrations and can give me 30mins this/next week 🙂

Hey <!everyone>, exciting news!!! 🎉 Infracost v0.10.0 is now live. This release contains a major update to Infracost. We’ve now made parsing HCL the default behaviour in CLI!! This means: 1. A super fast CLI ⚡ 2. No cloud creds needed 🔒 😌 3. Cost estimates everywhere. Did someone say VSCode integration…. 🤫 4. Compare costs both historically and across branches 🕵️ 5. Automatically detect multi-project setups, Infracost loves monorepos infraheart Please read our migration guide for detailed information on how to upgrade. Thank you to all our lovely community members who made v0.10.0 a reality. We couldn’t have done it without you! 💪

Hey Folks, I just started with InfraCost today, so already on the latest version. Got into small trouble that I am unable to figure a way out of, here's the example I followed - https://gitlab.com/infracost/infracost-gitlab-ci/-/tree/master/examples/multi-project-config-file When I manually execute the

infracost breakdown

and

infracost diff

command, I see the diff json contains valid values for

pastTotalMonthlyCost

and

diffTotalMonthlyCost

(the others as well), However, from my CI Pipeline, from the above run, when the comment gets posted to my merge request on GitLab, I see this image (attached)

👉 Hi everyone, if you’re using Infracost v0.10 with Terragrunt and you notice issues, please see this GitHub issue.

there's a service-level cost leaderboard out there, but it'd be interesting if infracost ever hosted a resource type-level leaderboard: https://leaderboard.vantage.sh/

For anyone who’s ever had issues posting pull request comments from Infracost: please take a quick look at this GitHub issue and add any other ideas that could help debug this. It seems like most of the issues so far have been from the wrong token being used or the token not having the correct permissions.

Hi, I'm really excited about the 0.10 release, it will make integration so much simpler for us

I've been trying to work out the simplest way to decouple our ci from upstream infracost service outages. I see that there's a postgres-backed self hosted option. Has anyone explored a SQLite-backed architecture?

Hi all, I would like to talk about some „approach“ stuff to find the best integration of Infracost into our pipeline. We are using Azure Devops and have a single Git Repo, where multiple environments are in. Also we are using many self created modules, which are each in dedicated repos. We have configured CI and PR Pipelines which are working fine. When we now want to integrate infracost, with pull request comments, what would be the best approach for that? • scan each folder separately ans use „new“ as behavior • scan all together with the config-file and use update We have first try to add an additional build validation which just runs one time, but this pipeline didn't checkout the configuration repo any how. Thanks for your comments Jörg

👋 Hi everyone!